://software.newsforge.com/article.pl?sid=06/06/23/1728205&tid=150
--
Lewis Jardine
IANAL, IANADD
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
urther source distributing obligations. You could
probably assemble such a collection automatically, with a bit of dpkg
--get-selections | grep | apt-get source .
Once you've downloaded the source, another method that would work would
be to put all the source packages somewhere in
ficient to be a discrimination against a field of
endeavour? Would a simple 'Yeah, we meant license-as-in-certification'
statement from Sun suffice?
--
Lewis Jardine
IANAL, IANADD, IANARepresentativeOfSun
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubsc
rmation. This remains the case no matter how many
layers of obfuscation you add. If the original file is not DFSG-free,
then the part files are not either. If the original file infringes
copyright, then obviously Debian won't host it.
--
Lewis Jardine
IANAL, IANADD
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, ema
hen integrating it with an
existing GPL work. In effect, the GPL would become the LGPL.
--
Lewis Jardine
IANAL, IANADD
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
ominently, as any
| comparable authorship credit.
and 2.0 states
| at a minimum such credit will appear where any other comparable
| authorship credit appears and in a manner at least as prominent as
| such other comparable authorship credit.
I wonder if this might just be a rewording oversight?
striction
as failing to grant an additional permission, and then drawing your
attention to something that would be the case with or without the license.
--
Lewis Jardine
IANAL, IANADD
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Alexander Terekhov wrote:
On 4/10/06, Lewis Jardine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[...]
The GPL uses this language because it is intended to apply not only to
derivative works, but also to works that aren't derivative but do
contain the work.
Yeah, right.
The intent is that if
Max Brown wrote:
Bad solution:
in this way the license is compatible only with itself.
Actually, it's not. It's compatible with itself, and any license which
grants the same rights and only a subset of the restrictions. For
example, MIT, or zlib.
However, artworks are different from fun
Max Brown wrote:
The license is copyleft... :-) It's a clear license, imho.
If you assume that "the renunciation to esclusive[sic] exsercise[sic] of
rights referred to in the articles 4 and 5" implies a compulsion to
grant rights. I don't think it does, and if it's supposed to, there are
m
f you want to guarantee distribution of source over and above what the
GPL's requires, you're probably going to have to write your own license
(bearing in mind that it will not be compatible with the GPL's 'You may
not impose any further restrictions').
* Unless hav
t code." is not saying that you must
offer the source in the same place, it's saying that by offering your
source in the same place, you can discharge your source obligation under
3a instead of 3b; this is why Debian does not have to keep source
archives available for three years.
--
L
Raul Miller wrote:
On 11/4/05, Lewis Jardine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
(Tangentially, could someone please clarify this: to pass on the work
dual-licensed, do you need to comply with both licenses, or does the
copyright statement attached to the work that you've legitimately
t that the source
code is available. IMO, this is exactly what the GPL is supposed to be
doing: preserving the freedom to modify. This would be curtailed if to
modify a book you first had to scan and OCR it.
--
Lewis Jardine
IANAL, IANADD
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
the GNU
General Public License as published by the Free Software Foundation;
version 2 of the License only.'
--
Lewis Jardine
IANAL, IANADD
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Gervase Markham wrote:
Lewis Jardine wrote:
I'd expect Mozilla are interested in getting this file BSDed as part
of their tri-licensing project, so it might make sense to simply draw
Mozilla's attention to this problem and leave approaching RSA to them.
There seems to be some
.
[1] - https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=236613
--
Lewis Jardine
IANAL, IANADD
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
e author is.
Possibly they're thinking it was public-domained when the author posted
the full source to usenet? Depending on the country it was posted from,
might there be some form of implied license, similar to what happens to
the copyrighted text of a mailing list post?
--
Lewis Jardi
lthough you'd need to go
to a different office to get your DVD of source code. I see no reason
why the same people offering access to the source directly from the
webserver, and offering access to an identical copy of the source on a
different server should be treated differently by the GPL.
le and redistributes it, the
rendered-down file is the preferred form for modification.
This depends on you not lying (for instance saying that you edited it in
paint, when really you've got a multi-layer photoshop file you don't
want to share), but so do most things pertaining to
the same; if he was called
Jeff, he would have the option of exercising additional rights, but no
rights taken away.
--
Lewis Jardine
IANAL, IANADD
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
though: there seems to
be an even split between websites that do this and websites that roll it
up into one credit at the bottom.
If the clause were demanding that attribution go right next to the use
of the image, this would be non-free, right?
--
Lewis Jardine
IANAL, IANADD
--
To UNSUBSCRI
pyrighted) you don't need JPL's permission to copy them.
[1] - http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ1.html#piu
--
Lewis Jardine
IANAL, IANADD
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
t grants the recipients more rights. You can't, however, take
any rights granted by the unmodified GPL away (unless you re-write the
licence, chop the preamble, and call it something else).
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#GPLIncompatibleLibs - an
example of adding a term that gran
riction on both licenses); you have to give
them permission to use one, the other, or both, at their option.
you can ignore this bit
--
Lewis Jardine
IANAL, IANADD
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
the case that Mozilla
FireFox is mis-licensed, as its source is made available under the GPL,
MPL, and LGPL.)
* Though, of course, they don't grant you permission to grant additional
permissions; only the copyright holder can do that.
--
Lewis Jardine
IANAL, IANADD
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email
e Mozilla Foundation.
[1] - http://www.mozilla.org/MPL/MPL-1.1.txt
[2] - http://www.mozilla.org/foundation/EULA/firefox-en.html
--
Lewis Jardine
IANAL, IANADD
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
e point of it being on the license page, when (not being
part of the license) it is not binding to either the licensor or the
licensee?
3) why are so many people copying them into their copyright notices?
[1] - http://www.moxon.net/downloads/pdfs/travels_in_burkina_faso.pdf
--
Lewis Jardine
I
.
--
Lewis Jardine
IANAL, IANADD
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
e, however, that this paragraph is made a part of the
license, immutable without the consent of all of the copyright owners?
Meaning that, should the law change, the license won't?
--
Lewis Jardine
IANAL, IANADD
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubs
the license text. This
suggests to me that it is probably ok to simply change the message in
the Debian version to that of the new version.
[1] -
http://cvs.sourceforge.net/viewcvs.py/lirc/lirc/daemons/irrecord.c?rev=HEAD&view=auto
[2] -
http://cvs.sourceforge.net/viewcvs.py/lirc/lirc/d
claim only applies to derived works, seeing as
it is in the license for distribution of PHP? Rather than being a
trademark claim, is it not the case that this is an attempt to achieve
trademark-like behaviour with copyright law?
--
Lewis Jardine
IANAL, IANADD
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [
x27;t, he probably hasn't
given you the source?
--
Lewis Jardine
IANAL, IANADD
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Francesco Poli wrote:
On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 22:26:04 + Lewis Jardine wrote:
It is the convention in most mailing-lists, newsgroups, etc. connected
to Free software that you identify yourself by your name, not some
pseudonym or 'handle'.
>
I don't agree.
I'm a subscriber o
lt;>s, which is to let humans know who you are) should be your
real name, not the meaningless 'OSS'. At any rate, very few spammers
keep track of the name attached to an email address, so what is the
benefit of using 'OSS'?
If you're worried about keeping your name a se
in the trade of oil or oil-based products requires payment of a
0.5% royalty" isn't valid for Debian).
Of course, none of these guarantees hold for non-free; the only thing
that you can rely on for a package in non-free is that Debian has
permission to distribute it.
--
Lewis Jardine
IANA
to well known products. Copyright
problems?' at http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2005/01/msg00300.html )
--
Lewis Jardine
IANAL, IANADD
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
from this
software or not) may not misrepresent themselves as being the product
'PHP' when this is not the case'.
** trademark lay is not limited to only derived works, and trademark law
cannot prevent the truthful use of a trademark (for instance, 'Debian's
modifi
eract with the GPLed work*.
* of course, close coupling would suggest that the works are derived
from each other, unless they were both implementing some kind of
third-party API, such as J2SE, Directshow, etc.
--
Lewis Jardine
IANAL, IANADD
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a su
ribute the GPLed code to yourself, to receive a new version that is
unmodified for the purposes of section two.
--
Lewis Jardine
IANAL, IANADD
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
programs.
If it turns out that there are more linking relationships of this kind
(.Net/Mono seems ripe for this kind of thing to occur), large chunks of
Debian may be undistributable.
--
Lewis Jardine
IANAL, IANADD
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
that is their right.
Whether licensing under the GPL withholds permission to distribute the
work alongside GPL-incompatible works that the work could conceivably
execute or not is debatable. Whether the GPL, as a copyright license,
has the right to do so is not.
--
Lewis Jardine
IANAL, IANA
d with / part of Kaffe. There clearly are
bindings provided there. The GNU Classpath package is GPL'd, right?
-Brian
As I understand it, GNU classpath is GPL plus an exception allowing
linking to anything (http://www.gnu.org/software/classpath/license.html)
--
Lewis Jardine
IANAL, IANADD
--
To
I've never been able to find an answer to
this question, and it seems relevant to the debate: if it is truly the
case that an entity can lose the right to distribute forever, then the
Debian mirrors have already irrevocably lost the right to kaffe.
--
Lewis Jardine
IANAL, IANADD
e never been able to find an answer to
this question, and it seems relevant to the debate: if it is truly the
case that an entity can lose the right to distribute forever, then the
Debian mirrors have already irrevocably lost the right to kaffe.
--
Lewis Jardine
IANAL, IANADD
--
To UNSUBSCR
to tell which of A, W, Y or Z X was
originally written against?
Does this change if the program is aggregated with W and Z, but not Y?
--
Lewis Jardine
IANAL, IANADD
h of A, W, Y or Z X was
originally written against?
Does this change if the program is aggregated with W and Z, but not Y?
--
Lewis Jardine
IANAL, IANADD
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
ative fact; that there are thousands of
them, which may have taken a lot of effort to gather, is immaterial).
It may be the case that the data could be plucked from the RFC and
freely distributed, albeit only in places that don't allow 'sweat of the
brow' copyrights.
--
Lewis Jardine
IANAL, IANADD
s a correct interpretation?
On the subject of core components, the GPL itself mentions the
'compiler', which is not required to be installed. I'm not sure that not
being required for every installation is sufficient to disqualify
something from being a 'major component' of an operating system.
--
Lewis Jardine
IANAL, IANADD
e correct term for a work that combines two other works,
created without creative input?
--
Lewis Jardine
IANAL, IANADD
reading is correct), this is not a pressing problem,
until/unless Debian starts distributing code that was distributed by the
upstream after his infringing action?
--
Lewis Jardine
IANAL IANADD
t)? Your hand-optimised assembler code is now part of the source,
and if you don't provide the assembler source, the source is not complete.
--
Lewis Jardine
IANAL IANADD
gt;Non-free bits removed:
>
>* Keyspan firmware.
>* SMC Token Ring firmware, driver disabled.
>* ACENIC firwmare, driver disabled.
>* DGRS firmware, driver disabled.
>* DAB firmware, driver disabled.
--
Lewis Jardine
IANAL IANADD
so,") were just examples of what could be done with the right to "deal
in the Software without restriction"?
--
Lewis Jardine
IANAL IANADD
ions of it at all.
It is hard to be sure whether any given program that doesn't use ssl was
written against curl+ssl (and therefore explicitly permitting such
linkage), or against a curl without ssl (at best not implicitly
permitting such linkage, and at worst expressly forbidding it).
--
Lewis Jardine
IANAL IANADD
copy part of the code of the
Library into a program that is not a library. "
--
Lewis Jardine
IANAL IANADD
;?
As we all know, any TC language can be converted into any other TC
language. It doesn't matter to the operation of the linker which
language it's written in.
--
Lewis Jardine
IANAL IANADD
such as
Microsoft Office don't use copyright to restrict 'public performance' of
the program, instead relying on an EULA
(http://download.microsoft.com/download/1/2/5/12538ba0-3d24-4f00-aab1-dd9ff4aacfc9/en_client_eula.pdf).
--
Lewis Jardine
IANAL IANADD
on-fallacious arguments in the body of the quoted
message, but I suspect many people didn't realise they were there.
Also, "shut Brian up, and let me back to work on my packages." is, in my
opinion, a rather hostile phrase to use when opening a conversation.
--
Lewis Jardine
IANAL IANADD
re all these trademarks lawyer-bait as well?
--
Lewis Jardine
IANAL IANADD
d
release it under a Free copyright license. Would it be the case that a
third party could start the 'Bumblebee Car Wash Company', use your Free
graphic as their logo, and register it as a trademark? Could they then
use their trademark to stop you using your free image? They wouldn't be
infringing your copyright because of your free license.
--
Lewis Jardine
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
esharing, etc.
for purposes which do not infringe copyright, then I suggest they
probably got them from the same place they got their 'movie trailers' from.
--
Lewis Jardine
IANAL IANADD
everyone else that reads it) to provide carriage in exchange for money.
By getting on the bus and giving money to the driver, you simultaneously
accept the contract, and carry out your obligation under it. Should the
bus break down, the bus company is contractually obligated to either
refund your money, or send another bud to take you to your destination.
--
Lewis Jardine
IANAL IANADD
, the phone is not consideration, as it
your phone, not theirs. They are not actually giving you anything when
they return your phone).
[1] - I cite http://www.cisg.law.pace.edu/cisg/text/peclcomp29.html ,
'promises binding'
--
Lewis Jardine
IANAL IANADD
licitly warn
the user that it is unsafe to use the software (the clause doesn't
prohibit use, merely points out that it's a negligent thing to do.)).
[1] - http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#GPLTranslations
--
Lewis Jardine
IANAL IANADD
t no other type of program in Debian is held to.
--
Lewis Jardine
IANAL IANADD
rks without
the prior written permission of Interbase.
II.3. Product Names. Contributor Versions and Larger Works may not be
called "InterBase" or "Interbase" nor may the word "InterBase" appear in
their names without the prior written permission of Interbase."
--
Lewis Jardine
IANAL IANADD
se
sections when you distribute them as separate works. But when you
distribute the same sections as part of a whole which is a work based
on the Program, the distribution of the whole must be on the terms of
this License, whose permissions for other licensees extend to the
entire whole, and t
courtesy to the author, not a condition for distributing
the work.
--
Lewis Jardine
IANAL IANADD
only clauses in the license that are requirements (as opposed to
requests) are "I grant permission to you to do any act with my work.",
and "No warranty offered and no liability accepted.", which seem the
same in intent as two-clause BSD (which is Free).
--
Lewis Jardine
IANAL IANADD
the
client computer need not accept the GPL unless he wants to. If he
doesn't, he may still use the software, just not copy or modify it.
--
Lewis Jardine
IANAL IANADD
or in such a way as to make the /license/
non-free. "
[1] I.e.: if it does it is a bug.
--
Lewis Jardine
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
ngineering.
--
Lewis Jardine
IANAL, IANADD
G free).
* I'm not trying to be facetious; I'd consider things like Linux, the
GNU toolchain, etc. to be crucial packages, and worth making an
exception for, should the GPL turn out to be non-free.
--
Lewis Jardine
IANAL, IANADD
system left
without the GPLed components.
[1] - http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=1Yma6-4cF-19%40gated-at.bofh.it
--
Lewis Jardine
IANAL, IANADD
Andrew Suffield wrote:
On Wed, May 19, 2004 at 07:29:10PM +0100, Lewis Jardine wrote:
"Copyright FSF, Inc; available under the GPL with no warranty, 'show
license' for details", only when stdout is a tty, and a configuration
option that will eliminate it completely. I
nsaction
manager code. We give him the stuff that we know will be hard to debug,
or needs to be very cleanly structured.
BigStorage (www.bigstorage.com) contributes to our general fund every
month, and has done so for quite a long time." - Is this really so bad?
Slippery slope...
--
Lewis Jardine
IANAL IANADD
iver is not a derived work of either a.o or b.o,
as it was originally written for windows/dos, and has nothing to do with
the kernel.
Presumably this situation changes if the proprietary code implements
some interface peculiar to a.o or b.o, as it then becomes a derived work
of a.o or b.o .
Hans Reiser wrote:
They often don't realize that I am
responsible for basic architectural features, like the idea of
aggregating small files together rather than always page aligning them,
Doesn't NTFS (invented in the early '90s) do this?
--
Lewis Jardine
IANAL, IANADD
n the other hand, show that the author really
intends some other license, which is often non-free.
GPL initially, followed by an amendment into 'GPL + rider' suggests that
the author fits into category b).
--
Lewis Jardine
IANAL IANADD
w.
Source: Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary, © 1996, 1998 MICRA, Inc.
""""
It would seem that in the case of XFree86, 'dumb' is neither insulting
nor inaccurate :)
--
Lewis Jardine
IANAL IANADD
well), Debian's guideline is that a
program using/implementing a patent-encumbered standard is not allowed
in main, unless the owner of the patent/trademark promises not to sue
developers of free software. Fraunhofer has no problem with mp3 decoders
(so mpg321 is in main), but hasn't ru
expected the links in '_free licenses_, _non-free
licenses_, and _licenses that don't allow redistribution_' to link to
definitions of the categories (rather than the list of licenses); maybe
others might also make the same mistake.
--
Lewis Jardine
IANAL IANADD
s is not supported software. But i might be able to a tech question
here and there
""""
--
Lewis Jardine
IANAL IANADD
ggests that later is better than less free, and thus the amendment was
The Right Thing, even though it may delay Sarge.
In my opinion, invoking the Social Contract is Debian's version of
Godwin's Law.
I'd say that it beats Godwin's Law, as the Social Contract is (at least
su
with
no legal restrictions that would prevent these kinds of use*.
"
--
Lewis Jardine
IANAL IANADD
of the GFDL, thus clause 2 of the GFDL can in some situations
break DFSG #1, thus GFDL is in some situations non-free.
To be Free, a license must not be non-free in any situation, thus GFDL
is not Free.
--
Lewis Jardine
IANAL, IANADD
ense. The US
export control laws are non-free, under DFSG #5 (No Discrimination
Against Persons or Groups), thus squeak (as licensed) is non-free (at best).
--
Lewis Jardine
IANAL, IANADD
ibution without providing source, not
deployment without providing source.
The discussion of The Affero License in the debian-legal archives may be
relevant.
--
Lewis Jardine
Henning Makholm wrote:
Scripsit Lewis Jardine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
If the code is as small and simple as described, clean-room
implementation should take about as much time as getting a reply from
Apple
The problem with clean-room implementations is not so much producing
them as deb
ht try my hand at documenting the boot sector. Is there anywhere I
can download just the bootsector image (not as a .sit)?
--
Lewis Jardine
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
exact position?
speedtouch does this, and it is in main.
If it's not ok for kernel-source to do this, speedtouch probably needs
to be looked at as well.
--
Lewis Jardine
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
interest in
clinging to this particular piece of IP.
If you're going to ask apple for permission to reverse-engineer, you
might as well ask them if they're willing to license the boot block in a
DFSG Free manner.
It's worth a try, anyway.
--
Lewis Jardine
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
c. I
could well be wrong; I didn't look at that many, and the site may well
be trying to pull a fast one.
--
Lewis Jardine
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
94 matches
Mail list logo
